51–60 of 759 posts
The best use of AI is to replace CEOs, C-Suite, politicians and bureaucrats. Let them feel the heat for the first time in their life. Interested folks can start by putting in shareholder resolutions with the proposal and the prompts that would replace CEO. SKILLs.md?
Feel the heat? As in, be punished? For what, exactly?
Number of people who think that a leader or a CEO can be replaced by AI and who themselves have actually risked everything to start a company, be a leader, or do anything similar: exactly 0.
Prove it.
> be a leader
There are a lot of bad "leaders" out there running Fortune 500s, fwiw.
If you just want a sociopath with faux accountability that's not very difficult, dime a dozen.
A team of software developers were recently let go so a company could replace them with AI. So they got together and created an Open Source AI CEO to replace the CEO and other executives. Hopefully, turnabout is fair play and this might even get some folks to think twice about using AI to replace people.
Corporate officers, including CEOs, have to be "natural persons" (legal jargon for flesh-and-blood humans) either directly by law or indirectly as a practical matter so the attempted turnabout falls flat on its face. Sun Tzu said to "know your enemy" and those who don't know the basics of how businesses and finance work have no hope of defeating them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people observe reality, where the workers end up being the ones held accountable for the CEO's decisions, not the CEO.
Workers are not legally or financially accountable for any of that. That is the whole point of a "job". I think you are confused.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people observe reality, where the workers end up being the ones held accountable for the CEO's decisions, not the CEO.
Workers are not legally or financially accountable for any of that. That is the whole point of a "job". I think you are confused.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feel the heat? As in, be punished? For what, exactly?
Wage theft
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people observe reality, where the workers end up being the ones held accountable for the CEO's decisions, not the CEO.
Workers are not legally or financially accountable for any of that. That is the whole point of a "job". I think you are confused.
What does a CEO(and other managers) do really? Sometimes the claim is "set vision" - which AI can extract from the collective. Someimes the claim is to prioritize the work (with bias), AI can extract that from the collective too, right? Making resources available to the team? AI. Coordinating between teams? AI. Can the AI do this in a more un-biased way? Can it refine collective intelligence and desire into objective…
To paraphrase Andy Grove: > The job of an executive is: to define and enforce culture and values for their whole organization, and to ratify good decisions. (And that's the whole list! Nowhere do you find set tasks or make decisions) To me, that means that they're still pretty essential - on both fronts, AI needs values and AI needs a system that can tell whether decisions are good or not.
So they need someone to review AI output huh?
What does a CEO(and other managers) do really? Sometimes the claim is "set vision" - which AI can extract from the collective. Someimes the claim is to prioritize the work (with bias), AI can extract that from the collective too, right? Making resources available to the team? AI. Coordinating between teams? AI. Can the AI do this in a more un-biased way? Can it refine collective intelligence and desire into objective…
To paraphrase Andy Grove: > The job of an executive is: to define and enforce culture and values for their whole organization, and to ratify good decisions. (And that's the whole list! Nowhere do you find set tasks or make decisions) To me, that means that they're still pretty essential - on both fronts, AI needs values and AI needs a system that can tell whether decisions are good or not.
For example an open-source project could/would still have a BDFL but, the AI-CEO could do the operational busywork while the BDFL is out talking to humans and presenting at PGCon or some other productive thing.
I get it’s a joke, and often a frequent cynical joke made here, but I actually think it’s a good thought experiment. Almost like a new Turing test The thought experiment, to be clear, is building an artificially intelligent CEO or company founder with the intent of generating profit. If this AI can turn a profit, it has passed this new test Of course, by the time this new AI starts turning a profit, it will be maximi…
You’re presuming here that CEOs cause companies to make profit instead of serving as a scapegoat for their often unavoidable market dynamics (at best).